Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George R. Harker


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was Keep. Agent 86 00:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

George R. Harker


Not notable outside of a particular group Pigman (talk &bull; contribs) 07:48, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, established author with at least 8 books, notable within his field. Ekajati (yakity-yak) 15:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Ekajati. -999 (Talk) 16:43, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, notability is not subjective and it does not matter in which group someone is notable, it does not matter either if we don't know anything about the author either. Alf photoman 23:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Ekajati and Alf photoman. &mdash;Hanuman Das 01:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete (My bad. Should not have voted here. I think a comment is OK?) Comment There are a number of factors I'm taking into consideration. At least five (and perhaps as many as seven) of his eight books are self-published and only one was definitely published by a press other than his own. His "Church and School of International Detente" has no footprint on the web at all except for his version of its establishment and destruction. I can't even be sure any person other than he was a member because there's zero information on it. Beyond these items, what's left in the current Wikipedia entry is his professional career as a professor and he was apparently fired after 21 years at W. Illinois Univ under circumstances impossible to know. (He claims persecution and martyr status but without info other than his version, I am reluctant to render judgment.) There's also his interest in and advocacy for clothing-optional/nude beaches, and that he's a "self-styled cyberSpace philosopher", neither of which I find particularly notable. If the writing on his web page is any indication, he's a remarkably sloppy and poor writer. Everything I've seen is purely self-promotional and I've seen no indication of independent recognition of his notability except for right here. This is what I see. --Pigman (talk &bull; contribs) 05:06, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * In my irrelevant opinion it is irrelevant by whom or why some books were published, relevant is if these books were noted or not. There is a big difference between books that are passed around in the extended family and those that actually sell -- no matter who published them Alf photoman 23:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep The bare fact is he's written at least 8 books and notable in his field. --Oakshade 23:58, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable in his field; it would be hard to find a MORE notable spokesperson in the Naturist movement. Rosencomet 18:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.